How to Design a Remote Patient Monitoring System? A French Case Study.
Care coordination
Complex intervention
Implementation
Oncology
Remote Patient Monitoring system
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 May 2020
19 May 2020
Historique:
received:
29
01
2020
accepted:
05
05
2020
entrez:
21
5
2020
pubmed:
21
5
2020
medline:
15
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Remote Patient Monitoring Systems (RPMS) based on e-health, Nurse Navigators (NNs) and patient engagement can improve patient follow-up and have a positive impact on quality of care (by limiting adverse events) and costs (by reducing readmissions). However, the extent of this impact depends on effective implementation which is often restricted. This is partly due to the lack of attention paid to the RPMS design phase prior to implementation. The content of the RPMS can be carefully designed at this stage and various obstacles anticipated. Our aim was to report on an RPMS design case to provide insights into the methodology required in order to manage this phase. This study was carried out at Gustave Roussy, a comprehensive cancer centre, in France. A multidisciplinary team coordinated the CAPRI RPMS design process (2013-2015) that later produced positive outcomes. Data were collected during eight studies conducted according to the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework. This project was approved by the French National Data Protection Authorities. Based on the study results, the multidisciplinary team defined strategies for resolving obstacles prior to the implementation of CAPRI. Consequently, the final CAPRI design includes a web app with two interfaces (patient and health care professionals) and two NNs. The NNs provide regular follow-up via telephone or email to manage patients' symptoms and toxicity, treatment compliance and care packages. Patients contact the NNs via a secure messaging system. Eighty clinical decision support tools enable NNs to prioritise and decide on the course of action to be taken. In our experience, the RPMS design process and, more generally, that of any complex intervention programme, is an important phase that requires a sound methodological basis. This study is also consistent with the notion that an RPMS is more than a technological innovation. This is indeed an organizational innovation, and principles identified during the design phase can help in the effective use of a RPMS (e.g. locating NNs if possible within the care organization; recruiting NNs with clinical and managerial skills; defining algorithms for clinical decision support tools for assessment, but also for patient decision and orientation).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Remote Patient Monitoring Systems (RPMS) based on e-health, Nurse Navigators (NNs) and patient engagement can improve patient follow-up and have a positive impact on quality of care (by limiting adverse events) and costs (by reducing readmissions). However, the extent of this impact depends on effective implementation which is often restricted. This is partly due to the lack of attention paid to the RPMS design phase prior to implementation. The content of the RPMS can be carefully designed at this stage and various obstacles anticipated. Our aim was to report on an RPMS design case to provide insights into the methodology required in order to manage this phase.
METHODS
METHODS
This study was carried out at Gustave Roussy, a comprehensive cancer centre, in France. A multidisciplinary team coordinated the CAPRI RPMS design process (2013-2015) that later produced positive outcomes. Data were collected during eight studies conducted according to the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework. This project was approved by the French National Data Protection Authorities.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Based on the study results, the multidisciplinary team defined strategies for resolving obstacles prior to the implementation of CAPRI. Consequently, the final CAPRI design includes a web app with two interfaces (patient and health care professionals) and two NNs. The NNs provide regular follow-up via telephone or email to manage patients' symptoms and toxicity, treatment compliance and care packages. Patients contact the NNs via a secure messaging system. Eighty clinical decision support tools enable NNs to prioritise and decide on the course of action to be taken.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
In our experience, the RPMS design process and, more generally, that of any complex intervention programme, is an important phase that requires a sound methodological basis. This study is also consistent with the notion that an RPMS is more than a technological innovation. This is indeed an organizational innovation, and principles identified during the design phase can help in the effective use of a RPMS (e.g. locating NNs if possible within the care organization; recruiting NNs with clinical and managerial skills; defining algorithms for clinical decision support tools for assessment, but also for patient decision and orientation).
Identifiants
pubmed: 32429987
doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05293-4
pii: 10.1186/s12913-020-05293-4
pmc: PMC7236289
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
434Références
J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2005 Sep;17(9):355-62
pubmed: 16115114
Nurs Older People. 2019 Nov 28;31(6):28-32
pubmed: 31778064
Eur J Heart Fail. 2011 Apr;13(4):450-9
pubmed: 21193439
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jan 23;18(1):33
pubmed: 29361934
Telemed J E Health. 2017 Jan;23(1):3-17
pubmed: 27116181
Support Care Cancer. 2017 Mar;25(3):863-868
pubmed: 27830394
BMJ Open. 2017 May 29;7(5):e014617
pubmed: 28554917
J Community Support Oncol. 2016 Mar;14(3):112-6
pubmed: 27058868
Support Care Cancer. 2017 Aug;25(8):2377-2385
pubmed: 28275897
Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2016 Mar 15;2:17
pubmed: 27965837
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019 Jul;30(7):1066-1077
pubmed: 30938894
JAMA Oncol. 2015 Jul;1(4):505-27
pubmed: 26181261
JMIR Cancer. 2018 Dec 21;4(2):e11978
pubmed: 30578217
BMJ. 2006 Feb 18;332(7538):413-6
pubmed: 16484270
Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2012 Sep;16(4):432-8
pubmed: 22051845
Implement Sci. 2019 Jan 5;14(1):1
pubmed: 30611302
BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655
pubmed: 18824488
Implement Sci. 2009 Jul 16;4:40
pubmed: 19607700
J Cancer Educ. 2006 Spring;21(1 Suppl):S11-4
pubmed: 17020496
JAMA. 2002 Oct 16;288(15):1909-14
pubmed: 12377092
BMJ. 2009 Sep 10;339:b3496
pubmed: 19744976
Health Care Manage Rev. 2017 Jan/Mar;42(1):76-86
pubmed: 26469705
JAMA. 2018 Dec 18;320(23):2461-2473
pubmed: 30561486
Am J Prev Med. 2011 May;40(5 Suppl 2):S208-16
pubmed: 21521596
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Jan 19;103(2):117-28
pubmed: 21228314
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Feb 13;17(1):133
pubmed: 28193214
Oncologist. 2016 Mar;21(3):354-76
pubmed: 26921292
BMJ. 2015 Mar 19;350:h1258
pubmed: 25791983
Implement Sci. 2018 Jun 26;13(1):88
pubmed: 29941011
Int J Med Inform. 2016 Mar;87:54-67
pubmed: 26806712
Int J Qual Health Care. 2009 Apr;21(2):137-44
pubmed: 19147593
BMJ. 2007 Mar 3;334(7591):455-9
pubmed: 17332585
BMC Med. 2010 Oct 20;8:63
pubmed: 20961442
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Jan 24;21(1):e10875
pubmed: 30679145
JAMA. 2017 Jul 11;318(2):197-198
pubmed: 28586821
Can J Diabetes. 2013 Apr;37 Suppl 1:S1-3
pubmed: 24070926
Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2012 Feb;16(1):73-82, 89
pubmed: 22297010
JAMA. 2019 Jan 22;321(3):306-307
pubmed: 30667494
Curr Oncol Rep. 2018 Mar 6;20(3):25
pubmed: 29511850
Implement Sci. 2018 Jun 7;13(1):80
pubmed: 29879986
J Telemed Telecare. 2018 Aug;24(7):500-507
pubmed: 28537509
JMIR Cancer. 2019 Nov 28;5(2):e15539
pubmed: 31778123
Eur J Cancer. 2015 Mar;51(4):551-557
pubmed: 25661828
Trials. 2011 Jul 05;12:168
pubmed: 21729277
JAMA. 2002 Oct 9;288(14):1775-9
pubmed: 12365965
Implement Sci. 2017 Feb 15;12(1):21
pubmed: 28202031
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jul 11;(7):CD007672
pubmed: 22786508
BMJ. 2013 Sep 10;347:f3755
pubmed: 24021722
N Engl J Med. 2011 Mar 17;364(11):1078; author reply 1079-80
pubmed: 21410378
ESMO Open. 2016 Sep 6;1(5):e000077
pubmed: 27843639
BMC Public Health. 2013 Jun 11;13:568
pubmed: 23758638
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2010;2010(40):81-9
pubmed: 20386056